Five reasons why Syndicate and XCOM will suck (and one why they likely won’t)

Why do people insist on messing up my childhood? It was a happy time full of whimsy and joy. Not anymore. My memories are tainted by what I have seen these past years. Once there were giant robots that held my attention; now they prance about in barely comprehensible fight scenes while we stare at Megan Fox. Stories of a war in space that touched something raw in us all have been made worthless on the whims of their creator.

Video games are not immune to this madness.

Two more games from my childhood have joined this not so auspicious group. XCOM from 2K Games, currently set for a March 2012 release and Syndicate, the recently announced game from Starbreeze studios.

Both are ‘reimaginings’ of 1990s games. Both are substantially different from those games. And both are causing a huge conflicting feeling in my heart.

Okay, I’m sure you’re thinking that I’m likely to hate on these games because they trample on my memories. Perhaps you reckon my judgement is clouded by emotion unbecoming of a serious games journalist. Well I’ll prove you wrong; I’ll prove you all wrong. I’ve even compiled a handy list to prove my point of why these games will suck:

1. They’re meant to be strategy games, not first-person shooters
XCOM and Syndicate are two of the most highly regarded strategy games of the early 90s. Many gamers still remember with teary affection the first Sectoid they killed or the screams of civilians being set on fire. Will it still be the same this time around when your viewpoint is down the barrel of the gun?

Of all the changes in the new games this, in theory, is the biggest slap in the face to gamers. These companies have taken old games and decided that people don’t want strategy. Nope, it’s FPS or nothing. I don’t care that I can use my head chip for head exploding, I want actual strategy. I don’t want to fight through alien dimensions with cover-based shooting. I want to tactically plan an assault on a UFO.

XCOM comes out of it slightly better, looking like a mix between Bioshock Infinite and Mass Effect 3. I still can’t shake the feeling a Rainbow Six style tactical shooter would be better. Syndicate just looks like any other cyber punk shooter.

2. The setting is all wrong
To be fair it’s a bit early to be calling this on Syndicate. It was only announced recently and everything is still a bit sketchy. Sure it looks like any other cyberpunk shooter but at least there are still evil corporations and mind control, so let’s give it some time to mature.

Now XCOM, there is a game setting I can get some bile behind. The original was set in the (then future) year 1999. The tech was pretty much accurate for the period and you had the whole world to look after. UFOs showed up, you shot them down and then went and hunted down the little grey guys inside. A contemporary version (or even the same) of this would work great.

Why, then, have 2K Games decided to change it? Suddenly we’re in 1952 with dimensional interlopers gunning for the US. No classic designs of Muton men or Cyberdiscs but weird polygon things turning everything to vector graphics. What the hell was wrong with the original setting?

3. A distinct lack of uniqueness
I fully appreciate that it must be difficult to come up with a new or unique idea. I don’t think I can. In the 90s you had a bit more scope. XCOM just had Laser Squad to deal with and Syndicate was almost alone in Isometric Real Time Tactics. So how is this proud heritage going to be recreated for 2011?

For XCOM this translates into aesthetics and interactions that look a lot like Bioshock and fighting and squad control resembling Mass Effect. Now these aren’t exactly *bad* influences but the overall effect is one of familiarity.

Syndicate is even worse. Ignoring the fact that it looks like Deus Ex it also looks like every other shooter set in a future that has yet to be blown up. I suppose it was one of the games that installed this image in our collective consciousness but that doesn’t mean it gets a free pass. If you didn’t tell me it was a Syndicate reboot then I wouldn’t know. Add in a proven bullet time mechanic (yawn) and a story of corruption and revenge (double yawn) and I’m not sure what is making it stand out other than the name.

Also, have we mentioned that they’re first-person shooters?

Unique, they are not.

4. A lack of fresh troops/mindless drones?
Some of my favourite characters in any game were the standard characters randomly generated by the original XCOM and Syndicate. This concept was followed up by several other games to enable you to project yourself onto a blank canvas.

Nowadays it’s all named guys doing named guy stuff. In XCOM it’s William Carter, the XCOM operative along with friends who join in to help kill the weird jigsaw-faced men. Can these compare to Sylvia Greisser, the hero who rose from a rookie to lead the fight on Cydonia, continuing even when injured? Or Gunter Leblanc who dragged three wounded soldiers back to the Skyranger during the horrific terror attack on Mexico City? I’m sure William will talk more, but he’s manufactured, not a guy who is unique to my game.

In the original Syndicate I didn’t even care about the names of my ‘Agents’. I was the head of the Corp. I didn’t know the name of the canteen staff two floors down so I don’t want to know the names of the trench coats murdering civilians in Paris. By putting me in the picture I lose the sense of being an omnipotent evil CEO and instead become ‘Miles Kilo’. I think I prefer my leather chair and big desk, thanks.

5. They’re ‘reimaginings’, not remakes
This is what it completely boils down to. By making these games, 2K Marin and Starbreeze Studios are putting the halt on the chances of an authentic remake of either game.

One reason (each) why they may not suck
In the interest of fairness I’ll admit that despite my misgivings it’s still possible these games could be great. Fallout proved that you can take an old concept, switch it around a lot and make it immensely entertaining. I’m sure someone, somewhere, wrote an article just like this one back then and is still eating the humble pie that came from it.

1. XCOM: 2K Marin are developing
2K Marin are certainly no slouches and have Bioshock 2 behind them already. Perhaps this is why XCOM looks so much like Bioshock. The concept is solid and the video walkthrough is intriguing. It’s not the game I wanted but despite that it could be an interesting and possibly fun game to play. I’m certainly keeping my eye on further developments.

2. Syndicate: There’s a flamethrower
Syndicate is harder to probe into because only the below video has been seen so far, despite it being scheduled for release before XCOM. Starbreeze haven’t got a huge title behind them, their biggest games are The Darkness or The Chronicles Of Riddick games, athough both are admirable in themselves. The gameplay that we have seen looks very well polished with some interesting features. Some of the melee and hacking abilities look fun. And there’s a flamethrower.

It’s never easy when other people get hold of your memories. Seeing an old favourite get remade is always going to cause some pain and it hurts even more when they are ‘reimaginings’ and nothing like the original.

You might say that using the XCOM and Syndicate names is just a way for 2K and EA to generate publicity, instead of taking the time to carry on the lineage. If that is the case, I guess it’s worked, I mean I’m writing and you’re reading this right?

Words by Ellis Covington (Twitter: @Evilshed)

Please register or login to post comments